Patna High Court

Deepak KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 8 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of his criminal antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Deepak Kumar, was implicated in an excise case for the alleged recovery of 34.5 litres of liquor from a vehicle he owned. He claimed he had no knowledge of the liquor being in the vehicle, had a clean criminal record, and that the actual offender, Lakshman, was apprehended at the spot. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his antecedents. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed. The decision was based on the provisions of Section 482(2) of the BNSS and the relevant sections of the Bihar Excise Act.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in the context of alleged excise offences.
Whether ownership of the vehicle, without possession of the contraband, suffices to deny anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise offence
vehicle ownership
clean antecedent
Section 30
Section 32
Section 482
Bihar Excise Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22336 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1233 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Deepak Kumar S/o Late Anil Singh Resident of Village- Bheriya Kala, P.S.-
                 Buniyadganj, District- Gaya

                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Vinod Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Rajesh Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-04-2026               1.    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                             2.    The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and

                   32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 34.5 litres of liquor from a toto vehicle.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be

                   implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized

                   vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use

                   his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22336 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
                                            2/3




          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,

          it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware

          that Lakshman would misuse the vehicle in the manner as

          alleged, who was also apprehended from the spot.

                   5.     Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                   6.     Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the

          event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks

          from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on

          furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with

          two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

          learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in

          connection with Excise P.S. Case No. 1233 of 2025, subject to

          the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

                   7.     It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court

          shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the

          event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case

          then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of

          seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this

          Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be

          confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a

          person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22336 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
                                                          3/3




                        anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…